Protein skimmer - Just for Nitrates?

[1journeyman]

Originally Posted by reefkprZ
..."Just about everything in a tank appears to be exported by skimming, albeit in often very low concentrations. ".....
I think that's the relevant part of the study for our discussion. The OP asked what is removed. Reefkpr simply listed everything that can be removed. He made it clear this is often in trace amounts.
Aquarists for years have debated just how big an impact skimmers have on removing trace elements. Many aquarists out there quit using skimmers on densely populated tanks because they saw a decline in coral growth and attributed it to element deficiency and blamed the skimmer for exporting them.

 

[dinogeorge]

Agreed. The incorrect use of, or using a poor quality, skimmer can pull a lot of things out of the water. But if it is used correctly, then the benefits surpass any residual loss of trace elements. And these elements will be replaced with any normal water change.
Based on Mademperors question, I assumed that he/she was not familiar with the function of a skimmer. The answer given suggested that the end result of using one would be that all of those elements listed were going to be removed from his/her tank, and that is just not the fact.

 

[miaheatlvr]

Look at it in layman terms,, do you want that black stinky guck in the collection cup IN your tank? I dont think so.. Debating how "GREAT" they are is irrelevant in my opinion.

 

[dinogeorge]

Originally Posted by MiaHeatLvr
Look at it in layman terms,, do you want that black stinky guck in the collection cup IN your tank? I dont think so.. Debating how "GREAT" they are is irrelevant in my opinion.
And that's the point. Well said!

 

[reefkprz]

as a point - the study tested skimmate (foam) and skimmer sludge the solid stuff that builds up and gets removed. read the article. its highly educational and you will see that the highest concentrations of elements (calcium included) werent in the extra water but in the solid massed sludge. If any one cares to say I'm wrong because they dont believe it I dont really care, psuedo scientific non research is going to prove only that some wont actually accept hard scientific data. just because you dont like the facts wont change them.
if your willing to show some real data showing that this study is skewed or falsified I would love to see it.

 

[reefkprz]

this is one of theose time when I really wish linking to information was allowed. it would be fairly simple to show research results from several studies that (while not all inclusive) show backing results for each other.

 

[reefkprz]

The protein skimmer is technically not a “protein skimmer” because it removes more than proteins, and the water is not just skimmed on the surface. The air bubbles are used to separate (fractionate) dissolved matter from the water by creating foam. The technically correct term would therefore be “foam fractionator”.
here is a quote from another source that has to remain un-named

 

[reefkprz]

here is another quote
The use of protein skimmers in reef aquariums is more controversial. In addition to removing protiens, skimmers unfortunately, also remove trace elements which are necessary for corals and invertebrates. Natural food sources, such as plankton, are also removed. If using a protein skimmer in a reef aquarium, these unwanted effects need to be taken into account. Some hobbyists will turn off the protein skimmer for 3-4 hours after adding phytoplankton.

 

[moneyman]

Originally Posted by mademperor
My father is convinced, and so are his expert friends that a Protein skimmer is only for Nitrates.
I was under the impression that it will pull other nasty stuff out of the water. I have a small one that makes a dish of green/brown nasty smelling water 1x day. I would think that contributes to more than -Nitrates (seeing how mine were 0 before I put the skimmer in)
They pull out DOC which can be protein, fat, poop, fish food, plankton, bacteria, and etc. All of these can break down to nitrate if left in the water column. DOCs is composed of many elements from the periodic table.

 

[srfisher17]

Originally Posted by mademperor
My father is convinced, and so are his expert friends that a Protein skimmer is only for Nitrates.
I was under the impression that it will pull other nasty stuff out of the water. I have a small one that makes a dish of green/brown nasty smelling water 1x day. I would think that contributes to more than -Nitrates (seeing how mine were 0 before I put the skimmer in)
Just for the fun of it, here's the original post, lots of good discussion....and the fact remains that skimmers don't even DIRECTLY remove nitrates in the 1st place. But, given the research that has gone into this post; I'm probably wrong.

 

[sepulatian]

Originally Posted by reefkprZ
sorry sepulatian, but yes they do.
they remove all kinds of things in various amounts. in fact skimmer are exceedingly efficient at pulling calcium out of our tanks. I dont think I said skimmers are bad. I just noted all the things skimmers are capable of removing from our tanks in any amount (small or large)
skimmers are capable of removing ANY organic or element that is susceptible to adhesion to surface tension. not just protien. some of the things on the list are removed in very minute amounts but they are removed.
the source of the information is a research study conducted by ronald l shimek phd on the efficiency of various forms of nutrient export the study included skimmate, skimmer sludge, caulerpa exfolia, and xenia. he ran tests to detect what amounts of what were in each type in question.
personally I like skimmers, IMO their benefits outweigh any possible detrimantal effects caused by removing some of the other things.
I see your point. In the earlier posts you came off as though skimmers remove a whole host of things from the tank. It gives the wrong impression. This is the New Hobbiest forum and those posts may make some new aquarists think that they don't need RO/DI or to even cycle a tank if the skimmer removes metals and ammonia, along with everything else listed. I see that you are stating that they can remove some in trace amounts. I do not doubt that that is true at all.

 

[dinogeorge]

And from that article his conclusion is:
“Prior to doing this study, I was quite convinced that none of the export methodologies that were available to aquarists were very good. I was surprised to find that that is definitely not the case with regard to many of the elements needing export. Foam fractionation, coupled with organism export, decidedly provides ways to remove many elements and to keep them from accumulating, given a normal feeding regime.”
So his results, as I read them, are that skimmers, although possibly removing some beneficial trace elements, are an effective way of removing toxins that otherwise would not be removed through other means. That is why skimmers are so successful and wide spread. Carbon also removes trace elements but its benefits, like a skimmer, outweigh the negatives to most people.
I just want to make sure that the reader understood that looking at your long list of what "could" be removed from their tank was not necessarily something to be concerned over. A skimmer removes the crud from a tank. Any trace elements removed from the water, as tiny as they may be, will be replaced with a normal water change.
As to your comment about my pseudo science vs your hard scientific data, I don’t think you are in a position to acknowledge that the “data” posted by this individual is beyond reproach. It appears to be very well documented, but his opening statement says that he relied on others for his samples. That alone opens the door to question how they got their samples. What sort of controls were in place to insure that the samples were not altered or tainted outside of his lab? You can’t simply assume that because someone does research, it is not flawed. Unless you did the research yourself, you have no way of knowing if it is accurate or not.
His findings could be correct. And if they are, he STILL concluded that the benefits of a skimmer outweigh the negatives he found.

 

[srfisher17]

Originally Posted by sepulatian
I see your point. In the earlier posts you came off as though skimmers remove a whole host of things from the tank. It gives the wrong impression. This is the New Hobbiest forum and those posts may make some new aquarists think that they don't need RO/DI or to even cycle a tank if the skimmer removes metals and ammonia, along with everything else listed. I see that you are stating that they can remove some in trace amounts. I do not doubt that that is true at all.
IME, depending on your water source, not everyone does need RO/DI water. It sure would never hurt, though, and eliminates a lot of possible problem areas.

 

[reefkprz]

Originally Posted by Dinogeorge
His findings could be correct. And if they are, he STILL concluded that the benefits of a skimmer outweigh the negatives he found.
so did I, I agree that skimmers are a benifit...... I never said other wise. all I said was they CAN remove other things and listed them....... you said they remove... protiens. your right they do remove protiens, as well as many other things. which was the entire point.

 

[m0nk]

I, for one, am very happy to read this information from an educational aspect. Like the SSB vs DSB conversations, the information provided should be used to make an educational decision regarding the well-being of our tanks, but often these conversations get bogged down with the controversy of how to read the data. Thanks for the great info, reefkprZ!

 

[dinogeorge]

Originally Posted by reefkprZ
so did I, I agree that skimmers are a benifit...... I never said other wise. all I said was they CAN remove other things and listed them....... you said they remove... protiens. your right they do remove protiens, as well as many other things. which was the entire point.

My point for responding to your post was to add clarification that the percentages of the items you listed were, in most cases, so miniscule they were of little concern. You gave a laundry list of items, but no indication of how “much” of these things could be removed through the use of a skimmer.
After reading mademerors post, it was clear that he/she was unfamiliar with how a protein skimmer worked. Your list “could” have been interpreted as a suggestion that a protein skimmer rips everything from the water. I just wanted to make sure that it was clear that that is not the case.
It had nothing to do with you personally.
Discussing every side of research is what makes that research valuable. To some it may bog them down, but to others it opens the door to a clearer understanding of the facts. In this case, it sounds like you, I, and the researcher came to the same conclusion.

 

[1journeyman]

Fwiw, Reefkrpz, Since your first post said "can also extract" I read it exactly as you meant it.
Guess we all just interpret things we read differently.

 

[reefkprz]

Originally Posted by Dinogeorge
My point for responding to your post was to add clarification that the percentages of the items you listed were, in most cases, so miniscule they were of little concern. You gave a laundry list of items, but no indication of how “much” of these things could be removed through the use of a skimmer..
I see your point. a lot of the things on the list are indeed very miniscule amounts. some higher than others and a few are ones we try to keep stable like calcium, skimmers remove calcium rather efficiently, so I was hoping to impart that when running a skimmer you should keep an eye on everything not just nitrates.
Originally Posted by Dinogeorge
After reading mademerors post, it was clear that he/she was unfamiliar with how a protein skimmer worked. Your list “could” have been interpreted as a suggestion that a protein skimmer rips everything from the water. I just wanted to make sure that it was clear that that is not the case.
It had nothing to do with you personally.

Originally Posted by Dinogeorge
Discussing every side of research is what makes that research valuable. To some it may bog them down, but to others it opens the door to a clearer understanding of the facts. In this case, it sounds like you, I, and the researcher came to the same conclusion.
this is true, I may have misread your fist posts intentions, I interpreted it as you were saying only a dysfuntional (or ill tuned skimmer) will pull out other things... there is buku research showing how many other things a skimmer pulls so it just didnt make sense to me. and we all know sometimes I get a little overzealous explaining and a little worked up (I try not to but I'm a really hyper person)

debates and discussions lead to greater understanding

I dont take any of it personally.
IMO skimmers usefullness in most situations outweighs any detriment caused by their function, I can dose calcium i can't dose protien-gon (protien-gon is a trade mark of BS industries and wont work because it doesnt exist

) any ways it was a fun discussion, and I hope it leads to a greater understanding of foam fractionation for everybody.

 

[stdreb27]

We also forgot the skimmer removes H20 from the tank...

I got the the bazzoka wielding penguin was trying to say. But the caviot would have been more than appropriate.

 

[reefkprz]

Originally Posted by 1journeyman
Fwiw, Reefkrpz, Since your first post said "can also extract" I read it exactly as you meant it.
Guess we all just interpret things we read differently.
yes we do. but it lead to a great discussion didnt it?